AdvancedMusic Theory ​Resourcesfor Pop Creators

​Bebe Rexha is about to drop her debut album, Expectations, which her fans have been anxiously anticipating following the massive success of her collab with country duo Florida Georgia Line, "Meant to Be" (which will receive its own post in a few days).

Currently leading the charge in promoting this album is the single "I'm a Mess". If you are reading this, you are probably already familiar with it, but just in case you can check it out here:

​The general rule in pop is that in order for a song to achieve mass appeal it has to do two seemingly contradicting things:
​

It should be similar to other hit songs in enough aspects to be perceived as 'speaking the same language'.

At the same time, it should be significantly different from other hit songs so that it stands out among the thousands of songs that compete for a spot in the charts.

Rexha and her songwriting team deliver on both ends.

"I'm a Mess" speaks the language of 2018 pop in terms of structure, sonic makeup, harmony, and, for the most part, melody as well.

But if you got to the chorus and thought to yourself "this is different/weird/edgy/harsh" you're probably on to something, and if you can't put your finger on it, I'm here to help you out.
​

There is quite a bit to explore in "I'm a Mess", but in this post I want to focus on the first thing that struck me when listening to it for the first time.

Specifically, the first time Rexha sings the word "hater" in the chorus really caught my attention because that moment is so unusual for a pop song it was hard to ignore.

But in order to explain what's so unusual about it I have to back up for a bit.

​Like most pop songs, Rexha's vocals in the verse and prechorus are purely pentatonic. A pentatonic scale is a major or minor scale that excludes the two notes that are most prone to dissonant clashes--in major keys it's ^4 and ^7; in minor ^2 and ^6 (^ is the symbol for scale degree, or the position of a note in a scale). The pentatonic scale is widely used in pop and other genres because it makes the melody and the harmony less dependent on one another. It allows mixing and matching melodies and chord progressions, repeating the same melody over changing chords, and creating sonorities that don't rely on stacking thirds.

But when Rexha hits the chorus, not only does she add ^2 and ^6 back in (C# and G in the key of B minor) but she places a huge spotlight on them and even moves directly from one to the other, singing a melodic tritone, which is an extremely rare melodic interval in pop. ​
​

Tritone in "I'm a Mess" - Click for full size

​
What makes this even more unusual is that it happens in the chorus--the chorus is traditionally supposed to be the easiest section to sing along to, and the tritone is considered not only one of the most tense dissonant intervals, but also one of the hardest melodic intervals to sing.

And to top off the craziness, Bebe sings the second note of the tritone (G) over an F#m chord, a super dissonant interval of a minor 9th, and really hammers it before resolving it down to F# (on the second syllable of the word "user").

As far as intense dissonant moments in pop music go, I really can't think of one that surpasses the "hater" moment of the chorus in "I'm a Mess". It's a harmonic minor 9th that's approached melodically by a tritone. There are myths about composers being punished in medieval times for using these intervals on their own, let alone in combination.

And I don't think these intervals were chosen by accident. At least I would be shocked if they were.

Everything is set up perfectly:

The stark shift from a purely pentatonic melodies that exclude ^2 and ^6 to a melody that heavily focuses on them.

The stacking of the harshest melodic and harmonic dissonanct intervals.

There's even a hint of what's to come in the guitar intro, when the bass line of the chord F#m momentarily moves up to G as an upper neighbor tone:

Beb Rexha's "I'm a Mess" guitar intro - Click for full size

​
And all of this culminates on the word "hater".

Just in case you didn't know, here is how Rexha feels about haters:

Fuck You Haters. You just trying to ruin people’s days. Miserable https://t.co/wL5kNzUehL’s Sunday go to church, go pray for a sense of humor & self love.

But again, this is pop, not Elliott Carter. ​We can't just throw around harsh dissonant sonorities willy nilly.

So how do Rexha and her team make this moment more palatable and singable enough to suit a pop chorus? There are a number of things:

​First, the melodic tritone is embedded within a sequence--two identical melodic fragments that occur on different scale degrees. In this case, the melodic fragments are D-C# and G-F#, so while the move from C# to G is a tritone, the sequential pattern helps to soften it.

Melodic sequence in Bebe Rexha's "I'm a Mess" - Click for full size

Second, the hard part in a melodic leap is hitting the 'target note', in this case G, or ^6. Since ^6 in a minor key is a note with a strong tendency to resolve down to ^5, this gravity helps to place it in a tonal context and remember it.

​And, of course, we sort of already heard the G-F# fragment in the guitar intro, which makes that moment in the chorus already seem somewhat familiar even on the first listen.

Meeting Expectations

Like I said, there is quite a bit to explore in this song, and I may revisit it in the future, but I think this particular moment was compelling enough to merit its own post.

Overall, I think "I'm a Mess" is a strong single and, along with "Meant to Be", can give Rexha's fans a lot to expect from Expectations.

Update (JUN-21-2018): In the original version of this post I made a reference to all of the songwriters credited on this song--Rexha, Shelly Peiken, Meredith Brooks, Jussi Karvinen, and Justin Tranter, as well as producer Devon Corey. It was pointed out to me that Peiken and Brooks are credited because the chorus in "I'm a Mess" is heavily based on Brooks' 1997 song, "Bitch", which they co-wrote.
​

Top40 Theory is a project aimed at providing advanced music theory knowledge and composition tools to pop songwriters and producers. Join the small but growing community of highly accomplished songwriters, producers, theorists, and composers at the Top40 Theory Facebook group. You can also follow Top40 Theory’s Twitter account and Facebook page, as well as join the mailing list via the form located in the sidebar, to receive updates about new posts and other pop music theory related musings.

Tonal ambiguity is pretty common in pop music. I know quite a few songs that can easily be heard in their relative major or minor. What I’ve never encountered, though, is ambiguity between different key signatures in a song that is on paper entirely diatonic to one key.

In comes the new Calvin Harris and Dua Lipa collab:​

​“One Kiss” (written by Harris, Lipa, and Jessie Reyez) is in the key of F major, at least according to the official sheet music published by EMI, which places a Bb in the key signature. Yet I hear it as being in the key of A minor, and to be honest I can’t imagine anyone hearing it differently.

Maybe it’s a Laurel/Yanny thing, which would be fitting given the ambiguity of Lipa’s 'reserved passion' in this song.

On paper, there is no reason to question the official key: The seven-note collection used in this song spells F major; the chords exclusively use these seven notes as well; and the vocal melody falls in line, or at least does not contradict F major. On its face, there is nothing in the sheet music that would lead one to believe that this song is in any key other than F major.

But every time the chords loop back to Am I hear it as the tonic chord. And when Lipa sings “One kiss is all it takes” in the chorus I hear these scale degrees:

​NOT these scale degrees:​

​​But someone decided that this song is in F major. It could be the songwriters (Lipa, Adam Wiles, Jessie Reyez), Harris, the person who produced the sheet music for EMI, or all of them unanimously.

​It’s possible that some of the people responsible for creating this song and disseminating the public information about it did so without really thinking about it too much and just went with what seemed to be obvious on paper, but I assume that at least one or two people in that chain listened carefully and thought it through before deciding on F major.

And to be clear, I’m not saying they are necessarily wrong. Harris, Lipa, and the EMI people may read this one day and think that I’m a moron for even suggesting that “One Kiss” could be in anything other than F major. You may even think so too, and that’s fine. But from my perspective this is something worth exploring, so here is my defense of hearing this song in A minor.

​The Makeup of the Chords​

I think the most important (and most interesting) reason for my hearing “One Kiss” in A minor lies in how the chords are constructed. Harris does something similar to what he did in his 2011 collab with Rihanna, “We Found Love” (I assume this was Harris’s doing because of this similarity): The bass line implies diatonic, root position triads, but the upper voices are made up of a repetitive keyboard riff that doesn’t quite follow the implied harmony. Instead, it colors the chords and makes the progression somewhat more ambiguous:

​

Click for full size

​The bass motion is A-Bb-F-G. Assuming each bass note initially implies a root position triad in F major, here is how the keyboard riff transforms the chords:

Am remains AmBb becomes Bbmajor7F becomes Fmajor7

So far these are not substantial changes in terms of determining the tonal center and quality of the key. But here is the really significant one:

Gm became G7sus2

(sus2 is the commonly used representation of chords in which 2 replaces 3 in a root position chord, even when it doesn’t behave like a traditional suspension)

As with the previous chords, the added 7th doesn’t change much, but what makes this last chord so important is the sus2.

(Note: from this point forward, for the sake of clarity and brevity, I will ignore the sevenths of these chords.)

The official sheet music lists the last chord in the loop as Gm9. However, the note Bb, which would be responsible for the minorness of this chord, is not actually present in this sonority. Even in sections of the song where the makeup and/or the order of the chords is slightly changed, there is still no Bb over the bass note G: In the bridge (2:35–3:07) the sus2 turns into a sus4 (which, like the sus2, is not an actual suspension and therefore does not resolve to Bb); In the postchorus (1:18–1:34 for example) we only hear the bass note G as a passing note with no upper voices.

In other words, the sus2 and sus4 neutralize the minorness of the chord we hear over the bass note G, making it possible to hear it as an unrealized major chord.

Combine this with the fact that the chord Am is on the strongest hyperbeat of this chord loop (and even in the bridge it’s on the third hyperbeat, which is still a strong hyperbeat) and just like that, the bass motion F-G-A that’s embedded within the loop starts to sound a lot like VI–VII–i in A minor rather than I–ii–iii in F major.

And this is important because VI–VII–i is an extremely common progression in pop music and is strongly associated with its final chord being the tonic chord of a minor key. In a genre that has significantly weakened the role of functional harmony and has all but done away with common practice cadences, the VI–VII–i progression is as close to a cadence as you will find, in the sense that it reinforces the ‘tonicness’ of i. So if you hear this F-G-A bass motion as representing VI–VII–i (which I do), it’s hard not to hear this song in A minor.

​The Other Side of the Story​

In order to make the case for “One Kiss” being in A minor, I need to acknowledge and address the elephant in the room: the presence of a B-flat chord and the absence of any B-natural in this song. So here it is:

Although I said that the F–G–A bass motion represents a VI–VII–i in A minor to my ears, I should acknowledge that the Bb–F motion sounds a lot like a pseudo plagal cadence (a cadential IV–I motion, as opposed to the more prevalent V–I). In fact, this is even strengthened if we consider the previous chord, making it an Am–Bb–F chord progression—If we call the IV chord in a plagal cadence an ‘alternative dominant’ then a iii that precedes can be heard as an ‘alternative predominant’ because it provides the up-by-step bass motion that precedes the cadence. Just like the aforementioned VI–VII–i, the progression iii–IV–I (or III–iv–I, or in some cases I6–IV–I) is also a common pseudo-cadential move. You can hear it, for example, as part of the chord loop of the chorus in Taylor Swift’s “Ready for It”, or in Tove Lo’s “Timebomb” (1:12–1:25), where it forms a rare complete cadence that reaches a resting point on the tonic, both harmonically and melodically.

Which is the True Tonic?​

​This is truly interesting—There are only four chords (with occasional minor changes in their makeup and order) that loop throughout the song. Yet, this seemingly diatonic and simple loop contains two competing pseudo-cadential progressions and constantly tick-tocks between the two possible tonal centers. So which one wins out?

Is it this one?​

Or this one?​

​Personally, I can only hear the latter, just like I can only hear Laurel and can only see white and gold.

While on paper, the F major plagal cadence should clearly take precedence, I hear the Bb–F motion not as an actual cadence, but as a plagal tonicization of F.

What does that mean? Tonicization is when you momentarily make a non-tonic chord sound like a tonic by creating tonal gravity toward it. Unlike a modulation, in which the music establishes a new tonal center and stays on it for a substantial period of time, a tonicization is brief and the music immediately adjusts back to the real tonal center.

​Although the B-flat never adjusts to B-natural, the sus2 alteration of the G chord allows us to complete the missing information in our brain and actively adjust it for ourselves, especially since the Am chord falls on the strongest hyperbeat almost throughout the song.

The Vocal Melody​

​Had I only heard the chord progression without the vocals, I believe I would still hear it in A minor, but I would also be able to hear it in F major if I really tried. However, the vocal melody seals the deal for me.

The main thing about it is that aside from a few touches on F as a passing note in the verse, Lipa’s melody throughout the song sticks to the five notes that make up the A minor pentatonic scale. And although I mentioned that the vocal melody does not contradict F major, it also does nothing to confirm it. Lipa sings neither B-flat nor B-natural, and seems to purposefully avoid any tonal closure. ​

Final Experiment​​

None of the above points on their own would ‘transform’ a song from F major to A minor: Just because a chord is on the strong hyperbeat doesn’t make it the tonic; the F-G-A bass motion could easily exist as I-ii-iii in F major; and a note doesn’t need to be heard in every part of the texture in order to ‘count’.

But while I don’t have a single decisive ‘on paper’ winning argument, my ears have decided for me that “One Kiss” is in A minor, and the combination of the factors I laid out in this article suggests that I might not be crazy.

Just to be sure, I decided to conduct one more experiment—I created several new chord progressions that are firmly in F major and ones that are firmly in A minor and played Lipa’s vocal melody over each of them. I may be biased, but this experiment certainly confirmed my initial hearing. Singing the melody over the A minor progressions sounded very similar to what I hear in the original song, while trying to sing it over the F major progressions sounded different and awkward, despite there not being harsh dissonant clashes.

I also tried to change the Gsus2 chord to Gm, and I still heard the song in A minor–The Gm chord just sounded out of place, although I must admit that changing it to a G-major chord still sounded strange. For whatever reason the sus2 sonority feels by far the most fitting.

So there you have it. I’m in the A minor camp and cannot imagine this song being heard in any other key.

​If you hear otherwise, or if you have more conclusive reasoning one way or another, I would love to hear from you, either in the comments below, on my Facebook page, or via email.

Wait---What About A Phrygian?

One last thing–I’m quite sure that at some point someone will suggest to me that maybe I should hear this song in A Phrygian, agreeing that A sounds like the tonal center but that the presence of Bb transforms the minor (Aeolian) mode into Phrygian.

So to address this point: Technically, this could be a valid way of viewing the modal makeup of this song. However, Phrygian mode implies that the Bb would be an upper leading tone to the tonic (A), and since the Bb in “one Kiss” does not behave this way but instead tonicizes F, I don’t think the tonal behavior of this song would be accurately represented by the Phrygian mode.

Top40 Theory is a project aimed at providing advanced music theory knowledge and composition tools to pop songwriters and producers. Join the small but growing community of highly accomplished songwriters, producers, theorists, and composers at the Top40 Theory Facebook group. You can also follow Top40 Theory’s Twitter account and Facebook page, as well as join the mailing list via the form located in the sidebar, to receive updates about new posts and other pop music theory related musings.

It's hard to call something a trend when it's been around for ages, but lately I get the feeling that a lot of pop artists try to outdo each other when it comes to showcasing their vocal range, and particularly its highest end. I hear artists reaching for their falsetto range so often that in my mind I started calling it The Vocal Range Wars, to paraphrase the Loudness Wars from the 1990s and early 2000s.

Even when the main vocal stays in a relatively narrow range, it's often doubled with a falsetto (or digitally transposed) line in some sections of the song, like in Ed Sheeran's "Shape of You" (0:46) or in Bieber's "Love Yourself" (0:48).

Shifting from one part of the singer's vocal range to another, especially to the extremes, is a very effective tool for grabbing and keeping the listener's attention. It's impressive, it makes the vocal melody sound more dynamic, but most of all it creates attention grabbing contrast, the kind that stops you from switching to a different station while you commute to work.

Contained Extremes: "Never Be the Same"

One song that has done a great job of preventing me from switching the station is Camila Cabello’s “Never Be the Same”:​

​At 0:45, when Cabello starts singing "nicotine, heroin, morphine", my attention is all hers, no matter what random musings were going on in my head previously. It’s not the list of addictive substances that hooks me into the prechorus of "Never Be the Same", though. What grabs my attention every time is Cabello's sudden shift to the very top of her vocal range, which, combined with the thinning out of the instrumental texture, places a very potent sonic spotlight on her voice.This would be effective enough in any context, but what really makes this a home run has a lot to do with the melody that came before it.

​Cabello starts the song in what is probably the very bottom of her vocal range and stays there for quite a while. This is her first two-measure phrase:​

"Never Be the Same" first phrase - click image for full size

​Now, let's compare this side-by-side with the first two measures of the prechorus:​

Vocal range gap between verse and prechorus - click image for full size

​As you can see, I had to zoom out quite a bit to get the piano roll to cover enough ground in order to make that comparison. The shift from a phrase that goes as low as E2 to one that goes as high as G4 is pretty significant.

In fact, it might have been too startling for the listener had she gone directly between these two phrases. It would also be very difficult for any singer to go from the lowest end of her chest voice straight to borderline falsetto. Which is probably why there are two glue elements bridging this gap.

The first glue element is the climb to E3 at the very end of the verse, moving to the middle of Cabello's chest voice range ("you intoxicate me"). The second is a two-note pickup to the prechorus ("just like"), which lets her both breathe and comfortably switch to her head voice before hitting those high notes.​

Transition from verse to prechorus - click image for full size

​But wait... did I just describe what happened as both a sudden shift and a smooth transition? Which is it?

Well, it's kind of both. Yes, the gradual melodic climb does smooth the transition to a certain degree. Still, as a listener, it's hard not to hear it as an extremely stark contrast because the verse 'lives' in one extreme vocal range and the prechorus in the other. The transition does just enough to help this shift avoid being too disorienting, but is also short enough to keep the effect potent.

Generating Tension

​Cabello's extreme vocal shift is not only great for capturing our attention in the moment. It is also extremely effective in amping up tension and anticipation toward the chorus.

Let me explain: Tension and release in music relies in large part on gravity. In nearly any musical aspect there is an element that acts as a center of gravity. Moving away from this element generates tension. For example, in functional tonality the center of gravity is the tonic, and every other tonal function generates varying levels of tension that are only completely resolved when returning to the tonic. In rhythm and meter, strong beats (and hyperbeats) similarly act as centers of gravity, which is why an attack on a weak beat that isn't followed by another attack on a strong beat generates rhythmic tension known as syncopation. Even in sound production there is usually a baseline of sonic energy that acts as a 'sonic tonic' (think of the first verse in most pop songs).

In "Never Be the Same", the push-and-pull between the extremes of Cabello's vocal range dramatically enhances the feeling of anticipation, because neither extreme feels stable. Arriving at the chorus feels like a cathartic 'landing', since it's the first time we hear her sing in her cleanest and and most powerful range.​

Free Movement: "How Long"

I mentioned a number of artists who use vocal range shifts in their songs, but one in particular who really gives Cabello a run for her money in my imaginary vocal range war is Charlie Puth.

​Take, for example, one of Puth's latest hits, "How Long":​

​Like Cabello, Puth showcases his ridiculous range throughout the song, which follows a similar vocal trajectory to "Never Be the Same"--He goes as low as C#2 in the verse (0:12-0:30), climbs two octaves up to C#4 in the prechorus (0:30-0:46), and 'lands' on his mid-high range in the chorus (0:46-1:04). In both songs the artists later revisit the highest range in their postchoruses.

But the melodic content in "How Long" is a different animal than that of "Never Be the Same".

While Cabello's verse centers around a single note, as I showed above, this is the first half of Puth's verse:

Charlie Puth - "How Long" opening phrase - click for full size

​This is a much more dynamic melody. Puth moves freely between the different areas of his vocal range, and does so in the other sections of his song as well.

While doing this showcases his immense virtuosity as a singer, it makes for less of a stark contrast between adjacent sections. Instead of extreme contrast between sections, the melodies in "How Long" feature fast-paced, abrupt changes in both the vocal timbre/range and the vocal production. Nearly every mini-phrase is different--either the main vocal line switches range, or it's harmonized/doubled differently.

These changes are more subtle than the single extreme change in "Never Be the Same", but they are extremely impressive and lend themselves well to repeated listening, because the listener can discover new details even after hearing the song multiple times.

Chart-wise, however, "How Long" didn't climb quite as high as "Never Be the Same" (though it still did very well, reaching #2 and #3, respectively, in Billboards Adult Top 40 and Mainstream Top 40 charts), which may suggest something about which type of contrast has more potential for mass appeal.

The Big-Picture Takeaway

​Chart performance aside, comparing these two songs is a good lesson in big-picture planning. The obvious lesson is that making a melody stand out is not only about the melody itself but also about its surroundings.

But this principle can be generalized to something like this:

Contrast and space are great tools for making any musical element stand out.

A specific note will stand out more if it is surrounded by rests or if it is approached by a melodic leap rather than by step.

A simple hook will be catchier if it comes after a complex melody.​A chorus will sound bigger if it follows a sonic break or a very thin texture (which is probably why "washout" effects like Dada Life's Endless Smile are so popular with producers these days).

A sonic texture will sound smoother if it's preceded by a rough texture (see the chorus of Taylor Swift's "Ready for It").

​This is not to say that every song needs to have these types of contrasts. Music would be very boring if all songs did exactly the same things. However, contrast is one of the most effective tools in music, especially in relatively repetitive music like pop, and is an important tool in the toolbox of any songwriter or producer.

Top40 Theory is a project aimed at providing advanced music theory knowledge and composition tools to pop songwriters and producers. Join the small but growing community of highly accomplished songwriters, producers, theorists, and composers at the Top40 Theory Facebook group. You can also follow Top40 Theory’s Twitter account and Facebook page, as well as join the mailing list via the form located in the sidebar, to receive updates about new posts and other pop music theory related musings.

Ariana Grande just dropped "No Tears Left to Cry", the lead single from her upcoming album. I don't know how it will do with the general public, but it certainly has people talking in the pop creators community. Two of the most active Facebook groups for pop songwriters and producers--Make Pop Music and the Max Martin Appreciation Society--have been abuzz since the release, hosting fierce debates about every aspect of the production, composition, lyrics, vocal performance, and cultural relevance of this song.

My first impression is that the songwriting and production team--which includes Grande, Max Martin, Ilya, and Savan Kotecha--is exploring some new territory. Only time will tell if their experiments will seduce the general public, but there are definitely a lot of interesting things in this song worth writing about. ​Check out the song:​

​Experiments in Deconstruction and Reconstruction

​​Max Martin has mentioned before that he is not shy about adapting to changing trends. He likely recognizes that the big hits today are looser and don't necessarily follow his famous melodic math. In order to loosen things up, some songs play around with unconventional melodic structures, others with adding chromatic harmony, and some even mess with the big-picture song form. But "No Tears Left to Cry" doesn't simply adapt or try to sound like another trending song. It out-loosens all of them by deconstructing everything--the melody, the harmony, the form--and then gluing it all together using his immense musical toolbox.

The Chorus

​For example, the chorus isn't nearly as tight or catchy as most of hit choruses written by Martin and his collaborators. Each subsection of this chorus is made up of four phrases, the first three being loosely related to each other and the fourth ("pickin' it up") almost completely unrelated. But several things make up for this not-very-catchy structure.

Previewing: First, There's a sonically stripped and slowed down version of the chorus as the intro (0:20-0:43), so by the time you get to the actual chorus (1:22), it's supposed to sound familiar.

(Note the text painting in the intro--Grande singing "pickin' it up" repeatedly as the tempo picks up)

Extending and gluing: The presence of the "pickin' it up" phrase is extended by having Grande repeat it as a rap. On the one hand, this rap serves as a kind of postchorus that is born out of the chorus, but on the other hand the shifts in both the sonic energy and the chord progression tie it to the following verse (I will elaborate on the chord progression in the "Chords and Melody" section). ​Evolving and fusing together different sections: The chorus also evolves as the song progresses. At first, as I mentioned, it's disguised as the intro. Then, when it becomes a real chorus (1:22-1:54), it's split into two subsections with partially different lyrics. Finally, toward the end of the song, the chorus is extended and transformed into a 'mega-chorus' (2:33-3:36) by fusing the prechorus topline into the continuous sonic texture and harmonic progression of the chorus (3:04-3:20), and then returning for another final iteration of the original chorus topline (3:20-3:36). This creates a large-scale unified section in AABA form. ​​

"No Tears Left to Cry" Form Breakdown. Click image for full size

​The Chords and Melody

Probably more than any other songwriter/producer, Martin is known for songs that stick to a single chord loop throughout all the sections and allow the topline and sonic structure to outline the form.

While in "No Tears Left to Cry" there are only two different progressions, they both do very un-Martin things.

The intro and chorus chord progression is extremely varied by any modern pop song standard, and evolves through each of the four phrases. From i-VII-VI-VII (Am-G-F-G) in the first phrase it changes slightly to i-VII-VI-v (Am-G-F-Em) in the next. Then comes a more significant change to III-iv-i (C-Dm-Am) in the third phrase. In the fourth phrase the chord progression cycles back to III (C), but instead of immediately embarking on a path to i (Am), it lingers on III, which is also the tonic of the relative major key, and only resolves to i in the following section, by moving through a passing tone in the bass.

The chord progression in the verse, prechorus, and rap sections is much more repetitive by comparison, but it is also adventurous by modern pop standards. It ventures into non-diatonic territory by 'majorizing' the tonic--instead of i-VI-VII (Am-F-G) we get I-VI-VII (A-F-G). This was pretty common at various times in the 20th century, especially in R&B, but unusual for pop songs in 2018.​If we count each variation within the chorus progression, that's five different chord progressions in the song, including one that is not entirely diatonic.

​This doesn't seem congruent with Martin's usual approach of keeping things simple. So what happens in "No Tears Left to Cry" to make things more palatable for the listener?

Parallel Intervals Between Bass and Lead Vocal

​The first thing I noticed about the prechorus was the parallel perfect fifths (off to the music theory Gulag, Martin and Ilya!) between the bassline and Grande's lead vocal.​

Perfect parallel fifths in the prechorus - click image for full size

​This sequence is repeated at the beginning of each of the three phrases in the prechorus, as well as another time with the synth playing the upper melody sans the vocal line.

The chorus is a huge shift from the prechorus in terms of the melody, the harmony, and the sonic texture, but it still features parallel motion between the bass and vocal line, which acts as a glue element.

This time, it's parallel thirds (plus 1 or 2 octaves) instead of fifths. The parallel motion in the chorus is not as rhythmically in sync as in the prechorus, but is still very obvious.​(Note: Due to the length of the examples, I separated the staff and piano roll notation below)​

​As a bonus, the backing vocals starting at 2:48 also move in parallel motion to the bass, with the most prominent voice moving in parallel octaves. These backing vocals are brought forward in the mix at 3:04-3:20 to continue the parallel motion because the prechorus melody and the chorus harmony are juxtaposed in this subsection and do not move in parallel.

The Prechorus Melody Stays Diatonic

In the verse, the vocal melody does hit on the C# that comes from the A major chord, but in the prechorus it sticks to C-natural and stays diatonic to the key of A minor.

This not only helps the prechorus feel more related to the chorus, but it allows the prechorus/chorus juxtaposition that I mentioned earlier (which is probably my favorite moment in the song).

The verse melody, for example, would have sounded awful over the chorus chord progression because there would be too much dissonant clashing. The prechorus melody, however, even though it is originally heard over the same chord progression as the verse, seems to have been carefully planned to work over the chorus progression as well.

​This juxtaposition gives us a glimpse into the high-level compositional skills of the songwriting and production team that created this song, and goes a long way towards molding the scattered parts of this song into a cohesive unit.

The Absence of a Bridge

One more thing that I found interesting is the big-picture form of "No Tears Left to Cry". It's made up of two meta-sections, rather than the usual three, and leaves out the bridge. There are songs that do this--Sia's "Chandelier" or the Chainsmokers' "Roses", for example--but it's certainly not the norm. In fact, I can't think of any bridgeless song that features Max Martin in the credits.

I have no doubt that this was not a random decision, and that Martin and the rest of the team had very good musical reasons that persuaded them to not include a bridge.

If I try to put myself in their shoes, these are the reasons I would come up with:

1. A bridge’s role is to provide contrast and “loosen up” a relatively tight structure. Since there are already quite a lot of loose parts in this song, loosening it up too much more could make it fall apart.

2. The prechorus/chorus juxtaposition in a way makes up for the absence of a bridge because it fuses existing parts to create something new. It is also located where a bridge would normally be.

Will "No Tears Left to Cry" Be a Hit?

My gut feeling is that this song's chart performance will be similar to that of another recent hit--Taylor Swift's "Look What You Made Me Do"--which soared to #1 on the Billboard Hot 100 but fell off pretty quickly. Both songs are interesting and have received a lot of hype upon their release, as one would expect from lead singles from two of the pop world's mega-superstars would receive. But both also venture away from a lot of current pop conventions, which can make it difficult to hook the masses for a long period of time.

That said, I would not be surprised at all if after a few weeks, "No Tears Left to Cry" seeps into our collective systems and proves once again that no one can come close to Max Martin and his collaborators when it comes to knowing not what their audience wants, but what it needs.

Update (APR-26-2018): A previous version of this post wrongly attributed the production of Taylor Swift's "Look What You Made Me Do" to Max Martin. As was pointed out in the comments below by Marcus Labanda, it was Jack Antonoff--and not Max Martin--who produced this song. I have updated the post to remove the attribution to Martin.

​Top40 Theory is a project aimed at providing advanced music theory knowledge and composition tools to pop songwriters and producers. Join the small but growing community of highly accomplished songwriters, producers, theorists, and composers at the Top40 Theory Facebook group. You can also follow Top40 Theory’s Twitter account and Facebook page, as well as join the mailing list via the form located in the sidebar, to receive updates about new posts and other pop music theory related musings.

It usually takes me a few listens to get addicted to a song. With "Delicate", it was instantaneous. I used music theory to try to figure out why.

​Sometimes you get hooked on a song and don’t quite know why. One of the nice things about doing music theory is that it gives you the tools to try to dig deeper and find out what it is about a song that makes you like it so much.The discoveries you will make by doing this are almost guaranteed to make your listening experience even more enjoyable, even if you're just a casual listener. If you’re a creator, this type of digging will no doubt add important tools to your toolbox.Case in point, a little while ago the music video for Taylor Swift’s Delicate popped up on my YouTube feed. I gave it a listen and was immediately hooked. I wasn't sure why, though. It's not the kind of flashy song that immediately makes your body bounce and you just know is going to be a smash hit. It feels kind of low key, something you would play in the background at a late night get-together with a small group of friends.

The vibe and the video were nice, but I knew there was definitely more to this that I didn’t consciously pick up on, so I went digging.

Below I talk about the cool things that I found, but if you haven't heard the song yet, now is your chance:

​And now, here are some of the things that I think made me like it so much:

The Tension Between the Formal and Sonic Structure

​Delicate starts with something a lot of EDM-inspired pop songs do to generate more tension and make the drop more effective. Instead of the verse–prechorus–chorus sequence coinciding with a sonic setup–buildup–peak sequence, the sonic progression shifts one section over. The verse and prechorus function as a sonic setup; the sonic energy then drops down in the chorus, making it function as a buildup; and the peak only arrives at the postchorus.Like I said, this is pretty common, but Delicate takes this concept one step further—it not only shifts the sonic progression within a meta-section, but it also shifts the dimensions across meta-sections. Let me explain: Most pop songs consist of three meta-sections. The first two start at the verse and culminate in the chorus or postchorus, and contain a setup-buildup-peak sonic progression. The third starts at the bridge and ends in the final chorus or postchorus. It includes a larger buildup and a higher peak.In Delicate, the bridge—which normally kicks off the third meta-section—is split between the second and third sonic meta-section. It starts at 2:44 and in terms of sonic density/energy is pretty much identical to the preceding postchorus (2:34-2:44). The energy then drops (2:55), and the bridge continues as a buildup toward the third chorus, which coincidentally is the first time in the song that the chorus functions as a sonic peak.

​In other words, the third formal meta-section “leaks” backwards into the second sonic meta-section.

Click on image for full size

​My first instinct was to think of 2:44-2:55 as some kind of post-postchorus. The music stays at a high level of sonic energy, which is one of the defining traits of a postchorus in modern pop, and the energy drop that follows at 2:55 sounds like a typical beginning of a bridge rather than the middle of it. But there are two strong reasons as to why this interpretation is incomplete. First, there is already a postchorus at 2:34-2:44, just prior to this section, and I would have to build a much stronger case to argue for the presence of two postchoruses.

Second, and more importantly, this subsection (2:44-2:55) and the next (2:55-3:08) are very obviously linked as a single formal section by a nearly identical vocal melody and a unique chord progression—iii-vi-V (everywhere else in the song it's i-ii-vi-IV). The fact that this unique chord progression ends on the dominant also makes it fit into the definition of a traditional bridge.

So from a formal standpoint, 2:44-3:08 is definitely a bridge and belongs to the third meta-section. But from a sonic standpoint, the second meta-section "hijacks part of it" and extends until 2:55. This shift is very unusual and creates some nice tension between the two dimensions.One last note on this: I’ve written about a phenomenon I called the Postchorus-Bridge Switcheroo. This is somewhat similar, but the two sides of the divide aren't linked in the way that I described above. I can't really think of any other song that does what Delicate does with the bridge.

The Sonic Arc

​The three meta-sections I mentioned above each have their own role in the song, but there is also a continuous arc that connects them. This is true of a lot of songs—the first meta-section is the baseline for sonic density and energy; the second meta-section is generally busier and more energetic; and the third first drops to the lowest point of energy and then builds back up to the highest peak.

In other words, they each play a role in a journey from the baseline energy to the peak through sort of a sonic roller coaster.

Delicate's producers—Max Martin and Shellback--use the usual tools to create this arc, like adding and removing elements along the way. But they add a few more magical ingredients to make it that much more effective:

1. A subtle low-pass filter on the entire backing track, taming the higher frequencies and gradually releasing them as the song progresses. It’s barely noticeable on a local level, but if you toggle back and forth between different instances of the same section (e.g., from the first to the second prechorus), you clearly hear the difference in brightness.

You can also see this in the spectrogram below. As the song moves forward, the bright yellow color becomes more dominant, which represents the increased presence of higher frequencies.​

Click on image for full size

​And as a side note, check out Ellie Goulding’s “Burn” for a similar effect, with a more obvious filter sweep over the first two-thirds of the backing track.

2. A 'deceptive' sonic move at the start of the second verse,which makes it momentarily sound like a bridge, but it quickly picks the energy back up. This is not a new move for Max, but effective nonetheless. 3. The third iteration of the chorus is the first time we hear it as a sonic peakand not as a buildup. This both provides an effective ending to the sonic arc and reinforces the general chill vibe of the song.4. The chorus-postchorus juxtaposition just before the outro. This is a signature Max Martin move, which helps the song go out with a (relative) bang.5. The use of a stripped-down version of the prechorus in the intro and the chorus in the outro. This reinforces the dominance of the sonic dimension.Each of these moves may not be a big deal on its own, but their combination goes a long way toward shaping the character of the song.

The Introduction of Functional Harmony in the Bridge

​Until the bridge arrives, the song avoids any meaningful functional harmony. The chord loop—I-ii-vi-IV—remains constant and there is no leading tone in either the vocal melody or the chords. Tension and release are achieved almost exclusively via sound production.

But when the bridge hits, the harmony all of a sudden becomes functional. The new chord loop--iii-vi-V—now includes the leading tone in two of its chords, and to add an extra boost of harmonic functionality, the dominant chord (V) lingers for a while at the end of the bridge, just before resolving to I in the chorus. This new functional chord progression not only provides contrast, but as I mentioned before, it also unifies the bridge as a single section, overcoming the internal sonic divide.

This combination of shifts in both harmony and sonics creates a fusion between a traditional (harmonic and melodic contrast; functional dominant) and modern (drop in sonic energy followed by a buildup) construction of the bridge.​

​The Melody-to-Chords Interaction in the Bridge

​The vocal melody in the bridge is made up of only three notes—G, E, and A—which also happen to be the roots of the three chords in this section.This creates an interesting interaction, in which the melody “chases” the bass/root motion. At a certain point it even mirrors this bass/root motion, though this is obscured by the rhythm and metric placement of the notes.​

Click on image for full size

​This is one of those cool things that are hard to consciously notice but can certainly make a subconscious impact on the listening experience.​

The Melody-to-Kick Interaction in the Bridge

In the second part of the bridge (2:55-3:08), both the kick drum and Taylor’s vocal melody feature the same prominent rhythmic element—a repeated dotted eighth.The image below shows the interaction between the kick and the vocal melody over a two-measure segment (2:55-2:59). Here are a few things to notice:1. The kick drum plays a repeated one-measure pattern, while the vocal melody’s rhythmic pattern unfolds through both measures.2. The first three attacks of the kick and the vocal melody are rhythmically identical, but Taylor starts an eighth late, causing the kick to “chase” her.3. While Taylor persists with the dotted eighths, the kick’s fourth hit is delayed by one 16th. The kick pattern then restarts at the next measure, causing the roles to reverse with Taylor now doing the chasing. 4. Taylor and the kick finally arrive together at the very last note of both their patterns.​

Click image for full size

​This is a really cool and noticeable moment, and it’s enhanced by the fact that it happens during the “fall” section of the bridge, which lets the heavy syncopation shine.

(Bonus: Notice that while Taylor's melody is nearly identical to the melody in the first part of the bridge, there is an added syllable, and the rhythmic pattern of repeated dotted eighth is extended here.)​

Well, that was fun...

​Honestly, when I started writing about this song, I didn't think that so many different things would go into the magic concoction prepared by Taylor, Max, and Shellback in order to hook me and millions of others. But there ya go.

And one last note: I realize I gave the bridge A LOT of attention in this article. I often zero in on the bridge as my favorite section in a song because it's located at a strategic point and it's where the writer and/or producer can do a bunch of creative things with the already established material.

Top40 Theory is a project aimed at providing advanced music theory knowledge and composition tools to pop songwriters and producers. Join the small but growing community of highly accomplished songwriters, producers, theorists, and composers at the Top40 Theory Facebook group. You can also follow Top40 Theory’s Twitter account and Facebook page, as well as join the mailing list via the form located in the sidebar, to receive updates about new posts and other pop music theory related musings.